Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 10 May (WA 281) and in light of their policy objective of reducing carbon emissions, whether they will approach representatives of industry and commerce, airlines and train operating companies in order to discuss possible initiatives to offertrain miles in substitution for or in addition to air miles.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: I refer the noble Lordto the Answer of 10 January 2006 (Official Report,col. WA33).

Lord McKenzie of Luton: The child maintenance premium allows parents with care in receipt of a prescribed benefit to keep up to £10 of any maintenance where the non-resident parent is paying child maintenance under the new rules. The child maintenance premium can be received with the prescribed benefit as an income disregard or be paid direct to the parent with care by the Child Support Agency. In March 2007, the agency was paying child maintenance premium in respect of around 57,000 cases. Our analysis is confined to cases where the agency is responsible for paying the child maintenance premium; we have not yet estimated the numbers benefiting from the income disregard.
	Our most recent analysis reveals that, inAugust 2006, there were around 13,600 new scheme child support cases in which the parent with care was eligible to be paid the child maintenance premium by the CSA, but was not receiving it from the agency. However, it should be noted that the parent with care is unlikely to be losing out financially in the majority of such cases, because they will instead be receiving the full amount of maintenance being paid to the agency by the non-resident parent. In particular:
	in around 2,500 such cases, the amount of regular maintenance being received by the parent with care is £10 or less. That is to say that the amount of maintenance the parent with care is currently receiving is identical to the amount of child maintenance premium to which they are eligible; andin around 11,100 such cases the amount of regular maintenance being received by the parent with care is greater than £10. That is to say that the amount of maintenance they are currently receiving is greater than the amount of child maintenance premium to which they would have been entitled.
	The reason that child maintenance premium was not in payment for all such cases is generally that, while Jobcentre Plus has notified the Child Support Agency that the parent with care is on benefit, the CSA has not yet made the required adjustments to the amount of maintenance received through setting up the child maintenance premium payment. In these cases, however, the parent with care retains responsibility for informing Jobcentre Plus that they are in receipt of child maintenance.
	In those cases where investigations reveal that benefit may have been overpaid, the decision as to whether to recover and the amount of any weekly repayment will be dependent on the circumstances in each individual case. In particular, in those cases where the benefit overpayment is deemed to be as a result of official error, the department can choose to waive repayment.
	No pilot scheme is or has been undertaken by the agency aimed at increasing the number of child maintenance premium payments. However, the child support agency is currently in the process of implementing a programme aimed at ensuring that all those parents with care eligible for the child maintenance premium are getting the correct amount of maintenance to which they are entitled.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Ashton of Upholland on 15 May (WA 29), whether it would be possible to amend the current systemof court fees by introducing higher charges for corporations and other wealthy litigants than for litigants of moderate means.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The idea of charging corporations and other wealthy litigants higher charges (court fees) totally cuts across our policy principle of setting court fees to reflectthe cost of providing the service. This is based on the general principle that parties are expected to pay the full cost of the civil justice system they are using to resolve their dispute. The Government's guidelines, as defined in the Fees and Charges Guide issued by the Treasury, generally prevent charging above cost as this would amount to indirect taxation. Charging above cost not only would discriminate against corporations and wealthy litigants, but may be open to challenge under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government have an ongoing programme of work to tackle gun and knife crime, led by the Home Secretary's round table on guns, gangs and knives.
	On 22 February the Prime Minister convened a summit to bring together government ministers, senior police officers and community members to discuss guns and gangs. Following this meeting, the Home Secretary announced a three-point plan to focus the work on:
	policing—ensuring the police are equipped to tackle gun crime;powers—giving the police and courts the powersto deal with offenders;prevention—empowering communities to take action themselves to prevent gun crime and address gang culture, and offering support to parents to challenge their children's behaviour.
	We are: reviewing the legislation relating to gangs, including the sentencing of juveniles; looking at the cultural issues around these offences; and considering the best use of available funding. Work is also ongoing to roll out the extended schools programme and provide targeted parenting support.
	At a local level, we continue to provide support to local community groups through the Connected Fund, which provides grants to groups tackling gun crime, knife crime and gangs issues. There are also a range of initiatives, such as Positive Futures, which support vulnerable young people and help steer them away from involvement in crime.

Lord Triesman: There is at present no consensus among EU partners on the way forward regarding the constitutional treaty or any new treaty. These issues will be discussed at the European Council in June.
	Any new EU treaty would only enter into force once ratified in accordance with the constitutional requirements of each member state. Any such treatyis likely to require legislation for its implementation in the UK and would, therefore, be subject to parliamentary scrutiny.

Lord Triesman: There is at present no consensus among EU partners on the way forward regarding the constitutional treaty or any new treaty. These issues will be discussed at the European Council in June. The Government's approach to these discussionswas set out in the Written Ministerial Statement of5 December 2006 in another place (Official Report, col. 10-11WS)by my right honourable friend the Minister for Europe, Geoff Hoon.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Karen Dunnell, National Statistician and Registrar-General, to Lord Skelmersdale dated23 May 2007:
	"The age distribution of Civil Servants is published annually in the Civil Service Statistics report. The latest publication is for 1 April 2005 and is available from the Cabinet Office website.
	www.civilservice.gov.uk/management/statistics/publications/xls/report_2005/table_g.xls
	Civil Service employment statistics are published only for fixed bands, for example 40-49, 50 and over. In order to provide the information requested for Civil Servants above the age of 65, an ad hoc analysis has been required. This analysis is based on the Mandate survey which currently provides approximately90 per cent coverage of Civil Service departments and executive agencies.
	Of these employees, 585 were aged 65 or over at 1 April 2005, approximately 0.1 per cent of the Mandate population".

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: It is not possible to provide a reliable estimate of the savings from changing the retirement age by one year. Extending pension ages has an impact on pension costs, which will vary with options chosen by retiring officers, and in some cases can rise in some cases as a result of later retirement. Extension would also affect pay costs and operational effectiveness.
	The effective employers' costs are expected to fall from the old to the new rates, as officers retire from the old schemes, and are replaced by officers joining the new schemes.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: In 2005 the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) wrote to every police force in the UK requesting crime figures on stolen number plates to assess the scale of the problem. Not all forces record this as a separate crime, but from the partial returns provided it has been estimated that there were around 33,000 reported instances of number-plate theft in 2004. A follow-up exercise indicated an increase to 40,000 thefts for 2005.
	There are no other official data for the period specified. The DVLA has requested, through the Association of Chief Police Officers, that police forces collect data on the theft of number plates fromnow on.

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have consulted with International PEN and the International Human Rights Federation concerning cases pending against Mr Ragip Zarakoglu, author and publisher, under Article 301 of the Turkish penal code; and whether attacks on freedom of expression and the delays associated with the charges are relevant to Turkey's application for European Union membership.